November 07, 2005

Those silly french

The "Michelin Guide to New York City 2006" was introduced last week to much hoopla. The second itreleased, all of my forms of instant messaging started popping up with linksto lists. eater list

Here are my first reactions to the list itself, having not yet picked up a copy of the book.

These people care deeply about napkins.

What kind of grading curve has as many 1st place finishers as 2nd?

Spotted f***ing Pig?

Boy are these guys not local.

On such a small island how do you make a special trip anywhere?

Is the idea that reason to visit NY is Per Se? All towns that people travel from have malls with food courts don't they?

I am sad to say I have not been to all the starred restaurants on the listand, not having known about Saul prior to it's release, I may owe a debt ofgratitude to Michelin for bringing it to my attention. I'll let you know.

That being said, how are Gramercy Tavern, Cru, and Picholine, on the samelist as The Spotted Pig, JoJo and Vong? The argument must be that these aredifferent kinds of restaurants and that Spotted Pig is the best Gastro Pub inNYC. This would have to be because it is the only one in New York branding itself assuch. Drop in the tavern at Gramercy or the downstairs at Savoy and you willsurely see that there are plenty of gourmet bars far better, and better atmanaging the crowds around the tables, in this town. Let's assume, then, that these undeserving examples appear because they are indicative of best of their type of restaurant. Where are Blue Smoke, Shake Shack, and Mr. Chow, then?

The Michelin reviewers themselves have made it obvious that French is what matters mostwith their Bouley decision. Gramercy and Union Square are both equals ofBouley on every level, the difference being that the former is French. Sowhy publish the book here in America?

Without greatly rewriting, here is how to fix it without spending many moreEuros: elevate Gramercy, Picholine, Nobu and, most of all, Cru to 2 stars. You willhave your four French, eight 2-stars, and a little room on the 1 star list for trulydeserving places like Hearth.

Comments

why is it so unbelievable that there would be nearly the same number of two star restaurants as three star restaurants? i don't think that the rating criteria takes into account how many other restaurants have received one, two or three stars when ranking an individual establishment. nor should it, IMHO - if there are legitimately four three star places and four two star places, that should be ok.